No Child Left Behind (NCLB) undoubtedly increased the federal footprint in education. As Congress debates how to rewrite the law, a new analysis from Bellwether Education Partners couldn’t be timelier.
The report starts with a look at the history of federal involvement in K–12 education and how NCLB tilted the balance of power toward Uncle Sam. Although NCLB started as a bipartisan bill with broad support, critics multiplied as the deadline for universal proficiency approached, interventions for low-performing schools mounted, and conditional waivers from the law were granted by the Department of Education. Among its shortfalls, NCLB included “over-prescriptive” provisions that mandate how a state education system should be run and a misguided one-size-fits-all approach.
But the law wasn’t all bad. Evidence suggests that NCLB’s accountability measures were effective in improving schools and student performance. These improvements were particularly evident among black and Hispanic students. The authors of this report applaud a requirement that states break down testing data into disadvantaged subgroups, thereby shining a light on students who are most at risk.
So how can policymakers keep the good (transparency and accountability) while ditching the bad (micromanagement)? The Bellwether analysts turn to the charter concept and argue that states should be granted much more autonomy in return for strict accountability concerning results.
Specifically, the authors call for a “performance compact system,” in which each state would come up with a plan or “theory of action.” Under this plan, states would create their own assessments, performance goals, benchmarks, and college-ready standards (as determined by in-state colleges and universities). The feds would get to sign off on the plans, and if states didn’t meet the goals they set for themselves, they would have to reapply with specific changes in order to continue receiving federal funding.
Overall, Bellwether’s framework largely abandons a system based on rules and regulations and instead designs one premised on performance. At its core is a commonsense agreement: In exchange for federal tax dollars, states need to show that taxpayers are getting a return on their investment. When that investment is America’s children, it’s essential to ensure the money is being used effectively.
SOURCE: Chad Aldeman, Kelly Robson, and Andy Smarick, “Pacts Americana: Balancing National Interests, State Autonomy, and Education Accountability,” Bellwether Education Partners (June 2015)
